How Creationist 'Origin' Distorts Darwin

Reader Comments
Back to blog

Thank you Dr. Eugenie,
The world need leading Sciencetists and science teachers like you to teach the people to accept the facts, and not propaganda from denial

Khin Win of CA 4:44AM February 25, 2012

Thank you for your inspiration, your article looks very good, I found through the search engine of your blog, I really on your information provided in your article. To thank you for your article, because your article content rich

dior outlet of AR 1:08AM May 30, 2010

Thank you for your inspiration, your article looks very good, I found through the search engine of your blog, I really on your information provided in your article. To thank you for your article, because your article content rich

dior of AK 1:06AM May 30, 2010

Nice blog as for me. I'd like to read something more concerning this theme. Thanx for posting this info.

Steave of AL 9:40PM March 09, 2010

Very nice Blog, I will tell my friends about it.
Thanks

Trernillera of AL 6:05AM January 30, 2010

As a devout Christian, Comfort's edition of Origin of Species is one of the worst attempt to hold to a discredited theory that I have seen.
Then again, I'm a Catholic, not a fundie, so maybe that's why the creationist nonsense has a hold among them (the fundies)...

Al of CA 9:07PM December 31, 2009

I am too busy doing science to care about the ramblings of some dysfunctional religious folk.
However, I do think that real question for the creationists is: can two of every species in the world today fit on a ship the size of Noah's ark? If not, then for Noah to have achieved his goal, there must have been some evolution in the meantime.

RR 10:56PM December 21, 2009

Okay faithful...where's YOUR proof?
This is a truly scientific problem, which shouldn't (I say shouldn't) have any root in religion.
Yet for some magical reason it does. Why is it that those of you who are faithful cannot simply leave science alone? As you claim we attempt to explain EVERYTHING we observe in this world. You are correct, yet your side is equally guilty of that aspect. The only difference is that we have PROOF. So please, be respectful of the world of science, and let the experts and scientists do their jobs, continue making cars to help move you, medicine to keep you alive, and pieces of technology to enrich your life, all the while you stare facts straight in the face and defiantly say IMPOSSIBLE! Our theories are attacked at every angle, yet you never see a man in a lab coat running into a church attempting to chemically measure your praying powers.
Also learn to pick your battles. You refute Evolution yet accept gravity. But then again, I've seen this quality of the pious before, as you pick and choose passages and books of faith to better suit your argument in a certain situation.
Either way, I probably wasted a good 3 minutes writing this, psychological theory brings up the wonderful reality of belief perseverance. Which means either side her has nothing to gain, and this debate will always and forever be reductio ad absurdum.

Xavier of FL 2:26PM November 29, 2009

TJ, since you didn't even have a rebuttal of evolution to offer, could you at least provide an alternative scientific explanation which is capable of doing the job better than the currently accepted modern theory of evolution?

Nick 5:53AM November 27, 2009

"It's all prediction...You say because you are educated so you can make predictions..."
No, we say that because evolutionary theory is a scientific theory, it constrains possible outcomes which allows it to make predictions. This is a concept fundamental to all theories in all branches of science.
What's wrong with education, by the way? Do you think that ignorance is a virtue?
"..the millions and billions of years modern evolutionist speak of are absolutely ridiculous! "
Well, the evidence shows that the earth is billions of years old. If you have a better explanation for the evidence, feel free to offer it. Arguments from incredulity have no value in science. It's worth noting that the founders of the sciences of geology and palaeontology were in many case devout Christians, who expected to find the Biblical account of creation confirmed. What they *did* find was that the evidence shows clearly and categorically that the earth is vastly ancient, and that it has been inhabited by a succession of faunas radically different from what we find today. Unlike creationists, they were honest and did not ignore or lie about evidence which contradicted their prejudices.
"We can trace our geneology all the way back to two people."
No, we can't. We can trace our ancestry back to a small group of people who lived about 120,000 years ago. Because the group was small - something between a couple of hundred and a few thousand individuals the genetic variation in humans is unusually small for a mammalian species. Evidence for this comes from mitochondial DNA for females, and Y-chromosome analysis in males. Contrary to the falsehood promoted in creationist sources, there is no evidence that the bottleneck was as small as two individuals.
"We find cavemen and we think that this is one of the intermediate species of evolution. Are you kidding me? It was probably some retard thrown out of some clan because of prejudice. Since he was retarded, they probably went the wrong direction and froze to death!"
...and now we descend to the utterly ridiculous. Fossils of early hominids are *not* "retards" (and the derogatory term speaks volumes for your moral values) , but individuals of species distinctly different from modern humans.

Richard Forrest 4:27PM November 26, 2009